Is God (Theos) "Definite" or "Qualitative" When The Article Is Lacking in John 1:1? The Word Was God скачать в хорошем качестве

Is God (Theos) "Definite" or "Qualitative" When The Article Is Lacking in John 1:1? The Word Was God

So far in this series we have discussed how Trinitarians object to the belief in one singular Person of God. They end up turning the Word of John 1:1 into a different Person with God the Father in the beginning. Some Trinitarians claim there is a distinction between God in each instance of John 1:1; arguing that God is referring to Father in one instance while referring to the Son in the next instance. They correctly believe that "God" with the definite article lacking must be taken and understood to be definite in order for this verse to be establishing the deity of Jesus Christ. But where Trinitarians who believe this way err is that they fail to recognize that if "God" with the article lacking is definite then it actually establishes that Jesus Christ is Yahweh, the one singular Person of God, incarnate. It in no way supports their belief that Jesus is an eternal Son (one of three Persons) incarnate. Some honest Trinitarian scholars have admitted that a definite "God" (Theos) in the statement "the Word was God" would be declaring that the Word was Yahweh, the one singular Person of God (a powerful statement of identity regarding Jesus Christ when compared with John 1:14). But since this understanding goes against Trinitarian belief that they believe to be true, they try and argue that the statement, "the Word was God" is only a qualitative statement that only emphasizes the nature of the Word instead of a definite statement of identity. In this video we will take a look at the rest of Scripture to see how this common objection to the belief in one singular Person of God and the belief that Jesus Christ is the one singular Person of God incarnate as our Saviour holds up in light of the entirety of Scripture. Some Trinitarian scholars believe that the definite article present before God in John 1:1 proves that a distinction is being made between the mention of God in the last phrase which is lacking the definite article before God. Those who believe this way try and persuade others that this means "God" is referring to the Father when the definite article is present but that God only refers to the nature of God (God in a qualitative sense) when the article is lacking. By comparing Scripture with Scripture we can see how this objection is totally inconsistent and self-refuting. The definite article is lacking dozens of other times in the New Testament when "God" is mentioned elsewhere in reference to the Father (Ephesians 1:2, 4:6, 6:23; Romans 1:7; Colossians 1:2; Galatians 1:1,3; Titus 1:4; 1 Peter 1:2; etc). 1 Corinthians 8:6 reveals how their own argument regarding definite articles refutes their entire belief structure and the entire point of their objection. They also fail to recognize that the Holy Spirit is referred to as "God" with the definite article present and Jesus Christ is referred to as "God" with the definite article present, but they inconsistently don't associate God in these instances with the Father. So inconsistent and deceptive! By allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture we can allow the Word of God to speak for itself, let go of preconceived ideas passed down through traditions of men, and the truth that there is only one singular Person of God whose name is Yahweh and that Jesus Christ is that one singular Person of God incarnate as our Saviour can then be received and believed. The name "Jesus" means Yahweh is salvation! All glory to the one true God!